Mumbai, India – February 3, 2022 – A special NDPS court in Mumbai has granted bail to Sahil Shah, also known as Sahil Flacko, who was arrested in connection with a drug seizure case. The court, presided over by Special Judge Dr. A.A. Joglekar, granted bail in NDPS Bail Application No. 245 of 2022, citing the lack of direct recovery from the accused and the primary reliance on statements of co-accused.
Shah was arrested in connection with F. No. NCB/MZU/C.R.-37/2021, registered with the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), Mumbai Zonal Unit, for offenses under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, specifically Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(A), 28, and 29.
Case Background:
The NCB had apprehended Ganesh Shere and Siddharth Amin on April 12, 2021, seizing 310 grams of Ganja and Rs. 1,50,000. During their statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, Shere and Amin named Sahil Shah as the main supplier. Shah, who had been absconding, surrendered to the NCB on January 27, 2022, and was subsequently arrested.
Defense Arguments:
Shah’s defense, led by Advocate Ayaz Khan, argued that he was falsely implicated and that no contraband was recovered from him. They pointed out that the co-accused, who were found with the drugs, had been granted bail, and argued for parity.
Prosecution Objections:
The NCB, represented by SPP Geeta Nayyar, opposed the bail, highlighting that Shah had been absconding and had his anticipatory bail applications rejected by both the Sessions Court and the High Court. They argued that his absconding indicated his involvement in the crime and that non-recovery of contraband was not a ground for bail.
Court’s Reasoning and Decision:
Judge Joglekar noted that Shah’s anticipatory bail applications had been rejected by the High Court, which had cited WhatsApp messages and statements of arrested accused as evidence of his complicity. However, the court also observed that the NCB had failed to mention Shah’s alleged involvement in two other similar cases and had not adequately presented the WhatsApp messages as evidence.
Crucially, the court emphasized that the quantity of Ganja recovered was below the small quantity threshold as per the NDPS Act, and it was recovered from the co-accused, not Shah. The court also relied on recent Supreme Court judgments, including State by (NCB) Bengaluru v. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr. and Dheeren Kumar Jaina v. Union of India, which held that statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are inadmissible as evidence.
“Considering the quantum of contraband recovered it is below small quantity and that to from the co-accused. There is no recovery from the applicant/accused. The applicant/accused is held in the present crime only upon the statements of the co-accused,” Judge Joglekar stated in his order.
Bail Conditions:
Shah was granted bail on the following conditions:
- He must furnish a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one or two sureties of the same amount.
- He and his surety must provide their residential addresses, mobile numbers, and email addresses.
- He shall not directly or indirectly influence witnesses.
- He shall not tamper with prosecution evidence.
- He shall attend the NCB office on the first Monday of each month until the trial concludes.
- He shall surrender his passport or provide an affidavit stating he does not have one.
- He shall not leave Mumbai without the court’s permission.
Implications:
The court’s decision highlights the importance of direct evidence in NDPS cases and the limitations of relying solely on statements of co-accused. It underscores the court’s adherence to recent Supreme Court rulings on the admissibility of statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. The court’s decision also shows that even when anticipatory bail is denied, regular bail may be granted based on the merits of the case and the evidence presented.